Thorsten wrote in Thu May 21, 2015 5:01 am:I think I commented elsewhere that water hardly ever looks like this and you moreover you can almost never see this from a plane because it's a shallow angle effect

So planes always fly at high altitude? Who sayd FlightGear is just about planes.. So far I have noticed vehicles like cars, boats, motorcycles and what about sea-planes and helictopters and harriers. Even human beings (walker)There are so many situations when low level water details would make a high diference in how realistic the simulator would look like.

Thorsten wrote in Thu May 21, 2015 5:01 am:The way FSX and X-plane used this is vastly overdone and unrealistic, and so I think this has a very bad pain to gain ratio.

As I see it, I will agree when it comes to oceans and big seas, but when looking at fjords, lakes and rivers i found X-plane high in water realism. I dont even think FSX has that much of a overdone reflection shader.

Sorry, I cant remember that.. I recently was involved in a accedent so my long term memory is weakened alot after that!

If you please just answer the question I dont need to post before and after pictures

Or I have a better question..Do you have the skills to implement water reflection? Or is it just so that you are that good you can make it in an hour but you cant waste that hour on making the simulator look amazing because you are worried your SpaceShuttle will be lost in space somewhere meanwhile?

If you please just answer the question I dont need to post before and after pictures

No, I will not.

See, you seem to be under the impression I have to read what you write and to react to it. But rather than have a civilized discussion, you chose to make your points in the past by attacking me personally on a level that got you suspended from the forum for a time, and there hasn't been any sign since that you understood that this was not acceptable.

Which also got you onto my ignore list. Every few months I read a few of your posts to see whether I should revise my assessment, so far I haven't seen anything which would really make me.

In other words, I really don't have to read what you write, answer your questions or deal with your problems or wishes. Live with it.

You take everything personaly Thorsten and the "pitty me"- tactic" is not working anymore. Be a man!!You sound like a over emotional lady when you pitty yourself like you did above! So civilized duscussion with you is kind of hard sometimes. I have tried my best before!

I was trying to be objective and straight forward on the topic and the answer I got was:

What is wrong with you? I havent posted on this forum in 6 month or something and still you have personal issues with me for giving my opinion on water reflection shaders.

But anyway to leave it short and objective and keep the emotions in controll; I have to assume there will never be water reflection in ALS as long as you are the one submit changes to it right? Thats what you saying?Ohh I forgot!! U dont need to answer me Leaving everybody who dont understand why there is no water reflection shader implemented fustrated and confused about the issue when it is you stopping it because you dont believe its relevant to flying!

Knowing Thorsten for a while now he is always very reasonable and open for improvements. So yes, if someone implements it and gets it to work with ALS he will cooperate to get it implemented. Maybe it takes a discussion or two but in the end there is no obstacle if any one want to give it a try and wants to do it properly.

punkepanda, after a history of verbal abuse from your side, it's not enough to be reasonable now to have a discussion, you need to make an honest effort to make amends for the past. In case you're genuinely willing to change your style, I'd suggest you go down that road and we may come back to having discussions. Right now, it doesn't look that way.

As I am the one who started the conversation concerning water reflection, I feel obliged to help stop the squabble.

Punkepanda (by name and by nature!). I believe what Thorsten is saying is that if you will agree to STOP being rude, arrogant, and snarky, he will willingly discuss anything you want.

To this I will add that from what I see, you are the only cause of any "problems" you have with members of the forum. Buck up! Stop being rude and opinionated, and try to carry on polite, civilised conversation with the members of the forum,.

Read over your last few posts to Thorsten. How would you appreciate being addressed like that? And it is quite unnecessary; the calm, level-headed, polite word is far more effective than screaming, except in gaining attention.

Hmmm.. What has the outcome of this discussion to do with me? I guess if there where any interest for water reflection by the main developers in here I dont think my comments would count much. But my key point is that there is very few of them here (only Thorsten on ALS) so there will be very easy to get a consensus for that in the "academic" society of FlightGear.

MIG29pilot wrote in Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:39 pm:Notice how blue-not green, turquoise or aquamarine, but flat out blue the water is-and not quite so reflective of light this far away.

Maybe this is already possible and I just don't know how or it isn't currently available.

I was working on the c172p's effects and observed something that I don't understand.

Using model-transparent I get a really nice reflection on the exterior glass that basically reflects parts of the aircraft that would be in the reflective line of site. For example I could see the reflection of the vent tube that resides in the upper left and right window at the bottom of the window when looking at the right angle.

Now if I use model-combined or model-combined-transparent I get the skycube but not the nice aircraft reflection.

Using one glass layer, is there currently a way to get both?If not, is it practical or possible to add that capability?

@Thorsten, while I am at it, you know I used the interior shadow on the interior glass by pure accident as I understand you never really intended for it to be used that way. With that said, it actually seems to work OK. Would it be practical or possible to combine it with the interior reflection logic so we can have both on the same glass layer?

Using model-transparent I get a really nice reflection on the exterior glass that basically reflects parts of the aircraft that would be in the reflective line of site.

Given what I read in the definition of model-transparent and what I know of how to compute reflection effects, I fail to see how this should be possible.

Reflecting a real scene element simply can't be done without an extra rendering pass. You'd first need to render the scene which is potentially reflected. Then you'd need to render what the reflecting surface can show. Then you'd need to render the final scene how you see the reflecting surface.

Would it be practical or possible to combine it with the interior reflection logic so we can have both on the same glass layer?

I see no problem in principle, though I'm not quite sure the real visuals shouldn't be different from what you have now. If you have pronounced MIe for instance, that's going to be completely absent when the surface is shadowed (drive with an ice-crusted windshield against the sun - you see nothing - reach the shadow of a tree, and suddenly you see again).